Welcome to Jester's Trek.
I'm your host, Jester. I've been an EVE Online player for about six years. One of my four mains is Ripard Teg, pictured at left. Sadly, I've succumbed to "bittervet" disease, but I'm wandering the New Eden landscape (and from time to time, the MMO landscape) in search of a cure.
You can follow along, if you want...

Friday, February 15, 2013

Cap and trade

Just a quickie.

CCP Fozzie has a new dev-blog out, folding all of the threads from Features and Ideas (which I've covered on this blog already) into a single post detailing all of the changes in one place.  Go check it out if you like.

Still, one quote in this dev-blog made me smile:
With these eight ships we are faced with a unique balancing challenge compared to the smaller classes. With Cruisers and Frigates the gap between the highest and lowest tiers was rather immense, and the plan called for bringing all of the ships up to around the power level of the highest tier.
You don't need to read on to see if Fozzie says the plan was the same for BCs, because it clearly wasn't.  Frigates and cruisers, by and large, all received large buffs.  The BCs?  Not so much: as I've already covered, all eight of the BCs are being flattened at around the level of the old Harbinger, not the old Hurricane.  ;-)

We're also provided with the following graph:

Unfortunately, this graph is about as useful as a city map with no street names, providing the general sense of how things are progressing, but no numbers and no scale.  Maybe there are five times as many Drakes as there are Feroxes (scale 2).  Maybe there are ten times as many (scale 5).  Fozzie did say in public somewhere how much Drake and Cane use are down in percent, but I can't find the post and it's not in this dev-blog.  Dear Heaven, do I miss CCP Diagoras.  Why is CCP so afraid to share hard data with its players?

The third thing that's interesting to me about how the BCs have been rebalanced is significantly more positive, though.  In previous "little things" sort of changes, CCP has altered course very little based on player input.  Usually, if a dev said something in a forum post or in the CSM minutes, you could count on that being that for that particular change... even if that particular change happened months down the road.  You'd get the forum post in January, then the dev-blog in May, and then the feature would drop in June and what the players or the CSM said from January to June made little to no difference.

I might bitch about the nerfing of my favorite ship class, but even I can't deny that CCP came into this with a vision of where they wanted to go, but allowed the specifics of how that vision would be implemented to be tweaked by player input.  In particular, when Fozzie was reminded that BCs need to be able to carry gang-links occasionally, that merited wide-ranging changes right across the BC line to accommodate that input.  If you think about past CCP behavior, that's rather refreshing.  Don't get me wrong.  I'm still annoyed my Canes got nerfed so hard and I'm generally annoyed that the level of awesome of the BC class has been lowered from 9.0 to 7.5 on a scale of one to ten, but it's hard to argue with the process that got us here.

Still means I have to buy a pile of Brutixes to replace my Canes, though.  Anybody have a pile of them they don't want?  ;-)

20 comments:

  1. Jester, I haven't seen you mention it, but what do you think about this change:

    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=198672&find=unread

    Bid deal, no big deal, or just :Greyscale:?

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Maybe there are five times as many Drakes as there are Feroxes (scale 2). Maybe there are ten times as many (scale 5)." Really Jester? Do you suddenly forget how to read a graph? Or are you suggesting that this graph may be some sort of log scale instead of linear?

    Assuming the graph is linear, to my estimation, it looks like there's 5.4 drakes to 0.4 feroxes, which means 13.5 drakes flown for every ferox.

    Also, you either missed, or are saving, what I view to be the most important line in the piece, by far: "obtaining a roughly linear increase in effectiveness should require an exponential increase in cost."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I already covered the narrowing gap between T1 and T2 ships, in December:

      http://jestertrek.blogspot.com/2012/12/narrow-gap.html

      I didn't feel I needed to cover it again, honestly. Hell, Fozzie's text in his dev-blog feels like a response to my blog post, though I'm sure I wasn't the only person to say those things.

      As for the graph, I didn't make it clear enough in the post, but it's unclear where zero is. If the graph is linear and zero is at the bottom, then you're essentially correct.

      Delete
    2. If this commitment to exponential cost for linear increases in power is actually adhered to across the board, I think there are very interesting implications for capital ships.

      As for the graph, now what you say makes sense. It still looks like a zero'd scale, to my eyes.

      Delete
    3. http://xkcd.com/833/

      Delete
  3. You one question; why is CCP so afraid of sharing hard data" is an easy one to answer. Many of the lies spun by the null sec zealot propaganda teams, inside and outside of CCP, would be completely shattered if hard data was available.

    Remember the 110 page null sec propaganda threadnaught about high sec / null sec industry that CCP closed 3 weeks ago? That thread would not have existed if hard data had been available to put to the lie the vast majority of the null sec camp's lies. And since the CSM / CCP dev's are merely another wing of the null sec alliances, there is zero chance of that data coming out.

    No data which runs counter to the null sec power bloc's goals, which means pretty much all data, will see the light of day.

    ReplyDelete
  4. As far as the Brutixes go... I suppose you have a Jita alt? Simply buy a bunch and let Black Frog ship them out to NPC-null...

    I always wonder how many people needlessly ferry their own stuff around, when specialists do it cheaply and quickly.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Lol, graphs without labels and values are about as helpful as twice used toilet paper. Once again CCP is demonstrating their most annoying habit of talking but not communicating things to the player base. This also happens to be the one and only problem with your previous post on the Eve uni money story. CCP needs to put more effort into actually communicating useful info to they're player base, usually it's not the what that they lack but the how and why that is always left unexplained.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It seems to me that the drake got even better for PvE.

    Sure a slight cost increase but the smaller ammo consumption will quickly balance that. Also the need to purchase one less launcher.

    Easier to fit as well.

    @skill 4 they are the same dps before/after @5 a hair better with the new.

    If i have an accurate version of the changes with an afterburner the new version is 11m/s slower. A bit less agile as well.

    A bit lower total hps sure. I'm not seeing it going from a 9 to a 7.5 from those issues.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm amused by fact that CCP Fozzie has admitted that the Ferox has been failing in its role as a railgun sniper.

    CCP Tallest dropped the ball on railguns, back when he was supposed to be fixing hybrids. He just didn't want to listen to the player feedback on the forums, and probably never even play-tested his lame ass changes on Sisi or TQ. What a loser.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Complaining about the nerfs to specific BCs, or the BC class overall, is rather silly. In the past, only a handful of ships were practical and everyone quickly gravitated to a few FOTM ships - mostly BCs. Boring, to say the least.

    Now, we get two big improvements to overall gameplay:

    1) All eight of the former Tier 1/2 BCs are now viable PVP (and PVE) ships; and

    2) BCs no longer automatically render cruisers as useless, esp. in small gangs.

    A wider range of effective ships makes the outcome of battles much more difficult to predict and thus far more interesting.

    I especially like the fact that Fozzie recognizes the dangers of power creep, and resisted the more common (and brainless) tendency of certain CCP devs to balance only by buffing. Kudos to Fozzie.

    ReplyDelete
  9. " I miss CCP Diagoras. "

    I too miss Diagoras... shit would I luv to see the stats on ANY BC non command ship that fits Warfare links. Does anyone ever put warfare links on anything other then supers, Command ships, or T3's?

    ReplyDelete
  10. So,

    - Ancillary armour repper
    - Medium reppers use 20% less grid
    - Armor rigs no longer reduce ship velocity

    Buff to triple-rep myrms amirite? :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Any idea if remote reppers will get this 20% PW reduction?
      The DEV Blog implies they will theway its writen but I've been told the forum threads ( in F&I? ) says they won't.

      Delete
    2. "Armor rigs no longer reduce ship velocity"

      Wait... what?!? Guess I should actually read the patch notes. Sounds like my Amarr boats just got a whole lot faster!

      Mke.

      Delete
  11. Jester, I say when CCP gives us a graph with an axis unlabeled that axis should be replaced with that Dev's name and "My Sexual Arousal" as per the SMBC comic.
    This would lead to some... interesting... implications for teiracide and CCP Fozzie's sex life.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think we need to keep an eye on Fozzie. Everything he does seems to consciously or unconsciously buff whatever Pandemic Legion doctrines are flying at the time.

    Am not a Goon and if it results in Goons eventually going to war and loosing their sovereignty (after all what are those Drake fleets and shield fleets going to do now, everything will be AHAC or other PL fleet doctrines) thats fine by me if it's for the moment only

    However longer term I don't want to see one corps fleet docs (Pandemic Legions) suspiciously buffed at the expense of everything else in the game.

    We'll know Fozzie gone completely to the dark side when he kills T3 cruisers and anything else WH's build so that precious PL can have a leg up in the tournaments. Fozzie has already started down that road. Don't think Fozzie is biased, go watch him cheer lead and pout in the replays. That's fine except when he's translating it into action and abuse of power.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you fucking retarded?

      Delete
    2. You are literally retarded and have no fucking clue what you are talking about. PL flys literally all classes of BS, all classes of T3s, all flavors of capitals, cruisers and frigs. They fly what ever is needed to counter opponents fleets. They don't care about changes to sub caps as they will just fly what ever is needed to deal with opponents fleet comps.

      Delete
  13. "We'll know Fozzie gone completely to the dark side when he kills T3 cruisers and anything else WH's build so that precious PL can have a leg up in the tournaments."

    What do you mean by this statement?

    ReplyDelete